Mourning in America - Trump Year One: November '16 to

On police shootings, I'm not sure it's a coincidence that so many of the worst police shootings has happened in the Midwest, that's where the focus and the battles have been most intense, and that's also where Trump did surprisingly well. There's a very real chance that BLM is costing the democrats important votes. But what to do about it, less focus on BLM, and the party base won't turn out to vote. It's a conundrum. However, everyone should remember the changing demographics, the US is becoming more and more diverse each day, so hopefully it will be less and less of a dilemma. Already Hillary Clinton won the popular vote with 2,5 million votes, and everyone seems to agree she was the worst candidate ever who ran the worst campaign with the worst messaging and she did absolutely nothing right. So hey, there's hope for 2020!

Good points (ymmv):

-electing him was achievement enough, like Michael Moore said, it was the biggest Fuck You in recorded history.
-mother: "I wouldn't want him to be my kids' Sunday School teacher...but I trust him to be President.
-treating millions of people as a monolith, whether it's trump voters or women or minorities, is wrong and misguided
-people focus on the white working class rust belt voters bc they're the ones that decided the election
-father of cop (voted Obama 08) crying talking about BLM "putting targets on officers' heads", and Obama and HRC "being OK with that"

Good insight, I should say. Bits I don't agree with in there obv...

https://newrepublic.com/article/138955/happens-trumps-populism-collides-ryans-austerity

What Happens When Trump’s Populism Collides with Ryan’s Austerity?
A battle over infrastructure could be the start of a big, bloody, intraparty war.

is there going to be "a big, bloody, intraparty war" y/n

Republicans never give a damn about deficits under Republican Presidents and what passes for infrastructure will be for-profit deals that benefit Republican suburbanites and rich donors, so no.

this is impressively shameless

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307462-trump-adviser-tells-house-republicans-youre-no-longer-reagans-party#.WDZK2iSZXRh.twitter

Moore has spent much of his career advocating for huge tax and spending cuts and free trade. He’s been as close to a purist ideological conservative as they come, but he says the experience of traveling around Rust Belt states to support Trump has altered his politics.

After such a transformative experience — and after witnessing Trump’s stunning victory — Moore now believes Republican House members should be less ideologically pure and instead help Trump give the voters what he promised them.

“He wants to spend all this money on infrastructure,” Moore said, referring to Trump’s potentially trillion-dollar infrastructure package.

It’s a massive spending bill that naturally appeals far more to Democrats than Republicans. Moore, who has worked for the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, is not a fan of the stimulus package, but he is prepared to support it.

“I don’t want to spend all that money on infrastructure,” Moore said. “I think it’s mostly a waste of money. But if the voters want it, they should get it.”

I dunno. The entire GOP at this point is a game where wingnut grifters try to outdo each other in performative displays of outrage; never forget that.

I was genuinely surprised when there was right wing backlash against the comments that he wouldn't pursue criminal charges against Hillary, because I had got my "dumbasses who don't really care about anything" Trump voters mixed up with the actual political right.

this seems impressively shameless

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307462-trump-adviser-tells-house-republicans-youre-no-longer-reagans-party#.WDZK2iSZXRh.twitter

Moore has spent much of his career advocating for huge tax and spending cuts and free trade. He’s been as close to a purist ideological conservative as they come, but he says the experience of traveling around Rust Belt states to support Trump has altered his politics.

After such a transformative experience — and after witnessing Trump’s stunning victory — Moore now believes Republican House members should be less ideologically pure and instead help Trump give the voters what he promised them.

“He wants to spend all this money on infrastructure,” Moore said, referring to Trump’s potentially trillion-dollar infrastructure package.

It’s a massive spending bill that naturally appeals far more to Democrats than Republicans. Moore, who has worked for the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, is not a fan of the stimulus package, but he is prepared to support it.

“I don’t want to spend all that money on infrastructure,” Moore said. “I think it’s mostly a waste of money. But if the voters want it, they should get it.”

The only way a trillion dollars of federal infrastructure spending would be a waste of money is if it were all siphoned off by graft and profiteering…oh wait

is there going to be "a big, bloody, intraparty war" y/n

imo this will depend on whether anyone gets in the driver's seat of trump's enormous, but delicate, ego. if no one person figures out how to consistently steer trump's ego, like a mahout steers his elephant or Rasputin steered the Czarina, then trump's erratic moods are going to cause a massive amount of turbulence and turmoil in Washington. Whether this sparks a big, bloody intraparty war will depend on how much the party leaders fear Trump.

this article assumes that the Trump team and Republicans are at odds in any meaningful way. Trump will propose a giant infrastructure bill that will be a bunch of kickbacks to developers and construction companies and massive privatization of public land, and the Republican Congress will happily make it a reality. They do not care about the cost as long as it enriches their patrons. The only question is how willing Democrats will be to play ball too.

If the bill looks like that i doubt the progressive dems who are talking about maybe cooperating will go for it. I think they're calling his bluff.

this rules http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/opinion/no-trump-we-cant-just-get-along.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0

it rules so much

I think that's my favorite column of the year

by anyone

This kinda throws it into sharp relief:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-identity-politics-trump-election-20161123-story.html

"You can blame us self-absorbed Berkeley liberals for the election results — but not our identity politics"

charles blow otm xp.

even if trump decides to govern as a moderate -- he won't -- that wouldn't excuse what he has already done by running a campaign based on hatred, exclusion, paranoia and lies

Can someone C&P the best bits from that Times column? Have reached the end of my NYT allowance for the month....

Stein is closing in on the full $2.5mn goal for three recounts. This should be an epic shitshow.

Here's the Blow column in full:

Donald Trump schlepped across town on Tuesday to meet with the publisher of The New York Times and some editors, columnists and reporters at the paper.

As The Times reported, Trump actually seemed to soften some of his positions:

He seemed to indicate that he wouldn’t seek to prosecute Hillary Clinton. But he should never have said that he was going to do that in the first place.

He seemed to indicate that he wouldn’t encourage the military to use torture. But he should never have said that he would do that in the first place.

He said that he would have an “open mind” on climate change. But that should always have been his position.

You don’t get a pat on the back for ratcheting down from rabid after exploiting that very radicalism to your advantage. Unrepentant opportunism belies a staggering lack of character and caring that can’t simply be vanquished from memory. You did real harm to this country and many of its citizens, and I will never — never — forget that.

As I read the transcript and then listened to the audio, the slime factor was overwhelming.

After a campaign of bashing The Times relentlessly, in the face of the actual journalists, he tempered his whining with flattery.

At one point he said:

“I just appreciate the meeting and I have great respect for The New York Times. Tremendous respect. It’s very special. Always has been very special.”

He ended the meeting by saying:

“I will say, The Times is, it’s a great, great American jewel. A world jewel. And I hope we can all get along well.”

I will say proudly and happily that I was not present at this meeting. The very idea of sitting across the table from a demagogue who preyed on racial, ethnic and religious hostilities and treating him with decorum and social grace fills me with disgust, to the point of overflowing. Let me tell you here where I stand on your “I hope we can all get along” plea: Never.

You are an aberration and abomination who is willing to do and say anything — no matter whom it aligns you with and whom it hurts — to satisfy your ambitions.

I don’t believe you care much at all about this country or your party or the American people. I believe that the only thing you care about is self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment. Your strongest allegiance is to your own cupidity.

I also believe that much of your campaign was an act of psychological projection, as we are now learning that many of the things you slammed Clinton for are things of which you may actually be guilty.

You slammed Clinton for destroying emails, then Newsweek reported last month that your companies “destroyed emails in defiance of court orders.” You slammed Clinton and the Clinton Foundation for paid speeches and conflicts of interest, then it turned out that, as BuzzFeed reported, the Trump Foundation received a $150,000 donation in exchange for your giving a 2015 speech made by video to a conference in Ukraine. You slammed Clinton about conflicts of interest while she was secretary of state, and now your possible conflicts of interest are popping up like mushrooms in a marsh.

You are a fraud and a charlatan. Yes, you will be president, but you will not get any breaks just because one branch of your forked tongue is silver.

I am not easily duped by dopes.

I have not only an ethical and professional duty to call out how obscene your very existence is at the top of American government; I have a moral obligation to do so.

I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything, but rather to speak up for truth and honor and inclusion. This isn’t just about you, but also about the moral compass of those who see you for who and what you are, and know the darkness you herald is only held at bay by the lights of truth.

It’s not that I don’t believe that people can change and grow. They can. But real growth comes from the accepting of responsibility and repenting of culpability. Expedient reversal isn’t growth; it’s gross.

So let me say this on Thanksgiving: I’m thankful to have this platform because as long as there are ink and pixels, you will be the focus of my withering gaze.

I’m thankful that I have the endurance and can assume a posture that will never allow what you represent to ever be seen as everyday and ordinary.

No, Mr. Trump, we will not all just get along. For as long as a threat to the state is the head of state, all citizens of good faith and national fidelity — and certainly this columnist — have an absolute obligation to meet you and your agenda with resistance at every turn.

I know this in my bones, and for that I am thankful.

who is donating thousands of dollars to jill stein's recount campaign in the middle of the night?

putin

VLADIMIR putin 🎶

I'm sure Breitbart will say it was a direct deposit from the Clinton Foundation or something

I feel like this is an utterly terrible idea. It's not going to change anything and will probably make Trump look somehow more sane and reasonable to people.

https://twitter.com/pwthornton/status/801259401902338048

oh for fuck's sake

actually i agree. tired of being held hostage by a bunch of cousin-fuckers who won't 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' and move to where the jobs are

I'm just so DONE with being nice to the crackers and petit-bourgeois basics who make up the current iteration of America's overseer class. My mother - who raised me not to be racist and to call it out whenever I could, but now watches bad cable news every waking hour - voted for (redacted) because she hated Hillary Clinton. She has the most incredible disconnect between her friends who get stopped for DWB, and the people BLM are trying to support. I have white school friends whose oblique FB posts about 'healing' indicate a GOP vote and an unwillingness to face even the most polite criticism from peers for voting for a racist, nationalist menace.

They voted for Trump because he 'says it like it is' but they can't handle any criticism themselves.

Saw a talk by Jenna Lowenstein (HRC campaign Digital Director) today - in addition to screening the intro video the campaign made for HRC's entrance, had she won on the night - spooky and sad alt history - in the Q&A she was asked "what would you have done differently?" Her reply - they should have risen to Trump's bait less often, and that he is clearly a master of the troll (not her exact words but the sense thereof), by which he manoeuvres his power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLSveRGmpIE

So what are the arguments against the audit, again? Even if there isn't any foul play things could hardly get much worse, right? And Stein is kind of perfect for this - she won't lose face if she cries wolf like Clinton would and the environmentalists have a lot to lose in the following years.

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15178963_10211652403891569_4956324805661818822_n.jpg?oh=79e8939cd67413d49a1a96cde960fe7d&oe=58D507A5

who is donating thousands of dollars to jill stein's recount campaign in the middle of the night?

Can't decide if this is just Jill being Jill or did the Clintons make her an offer she couldn't refuse...anyone with any sense had to realize they wouldn't go quietly into that good night. Remember when everyone jumped down Trump's throat for saying he'd wait and see what he'd do if he lost?

Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving. "First they came for the Native Americans and I didn't speak up", indeed...

There's a thing with DC liberals not wanting to be seen as 'unseemly' which prevents many of them from attacking things everybody knows are criminal, dodgy or unfair. Pretty sure it would be considered unseemly for HRC or her campaign chiefs to advocate on behalf of herself in this situation.

Liberals have morals, conservatives do not, is basically what it boils down to at this point.

So how many actual billionaires has this chord appointed so far? Two? Three?

President-elect Donald Trump has received two classified intelligence briefings since his surprise election victory earlier this month, a frequency that is notably lower — at least so far — than that of his predecessors, current and former U.S. officials said.

A team of intelligence analysts has been prepared to deliver daily briefings on global developments and security threats to Trump in the two weeks since he won. Vice President-elect Mike Pence, by contrast, has set aside time for intelligence briefings almost every day since the election, officials said.

Officials involved in the Trump transition team cautioned against assigning any significance to the briefing schedule that the president-elect has set so far, noting that he has been immersed in the work of forming his administration, and has made filling key national security posts his top priority.

But others have interpreted Trump’s limited engagement with his briefing team as an additional sign of indifference from a president-elect who has no meaningful experience on national security issues and was dismissive of U.S. intelligence agencies’ capabilities and findings during the campaign.

A senior U.S. official who receives the same briefing delivered to President Obama each day said that devoting time to such sessions would help Trump get up to speed on world events.

“Trump has a lot of catching up to do,” the official said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-since-election-win/2016/11/23/5cc643c4-b1ae-11e6-be1c-8cec35b1ad25_story.html

his ineptitude plus the buyer's remorse that is likely to show itself in six months is the only silver lining, if it even is that.

mid-terms are going to be tough too, gotta put a lot of effort into getting at least one branch of Congress back.

xxp:
Needs to be mentioned (again and again), the Voting Rights Act, and in particular the 1982 amendments to it passed by a Democratic congress, were the best thing to happen to the Republican party. A legal mandate to create 50% minority districts gave a lot of minority legislators job security, but wiped out Democratic representation in the 'burbs. Add in the benefits of incumbency, and the general election hasn't been competitive in most of the country's legislative races for the past 26 years.

There's been discussions in the voting rights legal literature of that reducing the mandate (I've seen 30% minority), would expand the effective political power of minorities, but its up to the Federal judiciary, and that means we're screwed.

Yep. Read Ari Berman's Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America.

There is no chance the Dems is getting any branch of government back. Not unless they win the Louisiana runoff now. There are eight GOP seats up, and while Nevada should be doable, and perhaps Arizona with a lot of effort, which one out of Mississippi, Nebraska, Tennessee, Texas, Utah or Wyoming is even remotely plausible?

The Dems should mount a challenge against Ted Cruz, if only to build up a Democrat base in Texas for the future. There's also a distinct possibility that the longer the people of Texas get to know Ted Cruz, the more repulsed they are of him, like anyone else who has ever spent time with the guy.

Would Cecile Richards be interested?

x-post: I also imagine Orrin Hatch has to retire this time? If so, Utah should be without an incumbent, and should definitely be ripe for at least a stronger democratic state party building on distaste for Trump. So there's a lot to do, and a shitload of seats to be defended against, but realistically no hope of a senate takeover.

Cecile Richards would be a disaster and discouraging.

If anything, the Castro Twins should be looked at it.

as far as Democrats have no shot in 2018 yada yada yada - there's no telling what might befall the country before then. This is shaping up to be the most corrupt administration in history - two months before inauguration.

strike the 'it'

It will be a great test of our country, that is for sure. Like the commercial that determines whether a suitcase can survive being thrown around by a gorilla.